The proof of this is simple - rewind the clock back a year to MacWorld where WorldBook Encyclopedia was demoed as part of the keynote with everyone watching and they were all impressed.
When have mac users not been impressed at MacWorld? BBSpot has a great parody story Apple Faithful Ready "Ooohs", "Aaahs" for Jobs Keynote. I'm not trying to criticize Mac users here at all, I'm just saying that impressing people at MacWorld doesn't prove much at all.
Yes, that's exactly why it should be made a new topic. If it were it's own separate topic, people who want to see every single kernel version post can see them, while those who don't can just filter them out. All that is being asked is that each person can easily filter out kernel version posts, not that they be stopped altogether.
Re:Having trouble with 2.4.17, should I get this?
on
2.5.4 Kernel Out
·
· Score: 1
NO! This is the beginning of a development branch. When a new devel branch opens up there are tons of changes made that may break various things. If you really know what you are doing and you want to try this kernel for _testing_ then go ahead, but it should not be used for bugfixes. There may be a bugfix or two that you like, but there are other changes that could destroy your system.
And the nopentium option slowing your computer down is in your head, I am running the same thing right now and it isn't noticible.
Try running a web server? Not even close, try just _pinging_ from the outside world.
Comcast blocks all traffic origination from outside their networks that I can find.
I almost got excited about this, then I realized that the Cable companies couldn't manage a decent ISP if you held a gun to their heads (believe me, I wish I could). As someone who has had cable modems since '95, let me tell you it has not been pretty. After the recent @home fiasco, I have lost all faith that even if this technology ever comes about, that it will be even close to anyone's expectations because the cable companies will ruin it.
We need an enemy to make ourselves feel better and killing becomes addictive after a while.
Reminds me of one of my favorite PLIF comics :
Bet you thought the world was round, didn't you? Bet you believed there were 'Bad Guys' and 'Good Guys' and people out there like us. There are no people like us. There is nobody else. We are stranded in space, waging war on ghosts to feel less alone. Welcome to Planet America.
I have an AMD Athlon 500Mz, with the most godawful motherboard (one of the ones based off the AMD _reference_ board), 128MB of RAM, an sblive, a TNT2, and a usb mouse. I haven't used a modem since 1995, so I won't get you started.
It works just fine for anything I do. I can watch divx perfectly well. Other than when I am watching a movie, using a game console emulator, or compiling something, I almost never see my processor usage go above 90% for more than a few seconds at a time. I have a monitor that lights up whenever it does go above 90%, so I can say this with certianty. 15-20 seconds is usually the longest, and that is mostly when I open a big program like the gimp or OpenOffice. I have no problem with the speed of my computer.
Granted, I have an SBlive, and a TNT2, which you admit lessens the need for speed. So what? Who can't afford an SBlive value? I got mine a few years ago for $20, if that's too much them please tell me where you get computer components. The TNT2 is there because I was thinking of getting into gaming when I bought the system, although it never really happened(coding is more fun than quake). If you aren't playing games your video card doesn't really matter that much. In fact, I actually wish that I had gotten something else, with better linux support.
Don't say that your requirements should be the standard, because it's not true. I don't know what you do that needs a system like you describe, but I find my system is fine for Multimedia, programming, word processing, personal web serving, web surfing, e-mail, and non-3d gaming.
The Olympics are a very profitable buisness. Like it or not, they are going to do everything in their power to maintain control of their product. What is their product you ask? Thier product is broadcast rights to the olympic games. Allowing web media more coverage will eat into their exponentially more profitable television broadcast rights, and so it makes little sense for them to do it.
Athelete sites are another matter. If atheletes don't like the terms of the Olympics, the don't enter them! No one if forced to be in the Olympics, they are an independant organization that holds an event, they get to set the rules. If their rules are not acceptable to an athelete, they should not enter them.
Now there is the question of whether or not what they are doing is right. Imagine you were a company that sells Do-It-Yourself books. Would it be wrong of you to prevent your employees from Making web sites that teach people do to do the same things that a book they worked on for you taught them to do? Would it be wrong of you to prevent other people from buying your book and putting it on the web for everyone to see? Of course it would not be wrong, I should hope anyone should be able to see that. The olympics are the same sort of case.
Let me lastly say that I don't like what has happend to the olympics. Even though what they are doing is perfectly just, I don't like it. I did not watch the Nagano Olympics for that reason, and I do not plan to watch the current ones either. But what I like has nothing to do with what is right.
I'm not saying I think the survey is wildly wrong, but I do think it is low because of the fact that anyone who sends Linux as their user agent is shooting themself in the foot. There are a whole lot of websites that will tell you that you need to be running a certian browser or Operating system, yet if you change your user agent the site works perfectly. I don't know many people that haven't switched thier user agent to something onther than linux.
How many people are there going to bethat are so ingrained with Microsoft products that they insist on using Outlook despite its many many flaws, yet they are willing to choose anything other than exchange?
Obviously this is a comment from a Mac user. I don't mean this as a flame. The idea presented basically tries to maximize ease of use to the computer illiterate with no regard for how much it hurts actual functionality. Apple has been tdoing this for years. They hide any real information from the user to make things easier on them. They got rid of the CLI, the next logical step is to remove the filesystem.
Again, I'm not trying to mac bash here, I even suggest macs to people who say all they want to do is browse the web and read e-mail. But the more you really want to use a computer, you realize that the more information you can get your hands on the better. This desktop idea would only serve to let people use the very basic functions of a computer, but it will never let them get any further than that.
Do people really use desktops for storing files? I know I see lots of half computer literate users with tons of stuff on the desktop, but anyone that understands computers rarely uses it for more than launching programs and maybe a few very important directories. Many of the linux window managers don't even allow you to store files on the dsktop, in fact, only the ones that tend to be emulating MS Windows do let you put things there. I use WindowMaker and I have never once wished I could place any files on the desktop.
This article is calling for the redesigning of basic filesystem operations because of an overly misused feature that a few GUI systems have. The "everything is a desktop" idea woudl be impossible to implement on anything that relys on non GUI systems. It would also mean that practically every application on earth would have to be redesigned to accomidate this filesystem method.
Rather than change everything to accomidate better understanding of this overly used feature, why not get rid of it? Teach people about the way computers really work with files, rather than keeping them in the dark about whats going on.
Give a NeXT style GUI system a chance, try WindowMaker or Blackbox, or if you are on Windows install Litestep. Give it some time and you will realize how poinless having files on the desktop really is.
Any math teacher that worries about students cheating by storing things in their caclulators should not be teaching. It means that they are testing the studens more on straight memorization than on thinking and reasoning. If you made tests that actually tested student's understanding of the material rather than what they memorized would eliminate the worry of notes in caclulators, since you can't store understanding in a calulator.
I don't use WindowsXP, but while a friend and I were working on something that used a 2MB dictionary file, we tried opening it in NotePad and to our surprise it worked. I used to hate the size limits for NotePad, and I'm glad to see they have fixed that by now, even if I don't use windows anymore.
Why go through all this just to stop kids from fooling around in class? If they are not going to pay attention in class then it is their loss. I not saying that no measures whatsoever should be taken in classrooms to make students pay attention, but there is a limit to it. If it was technologically possible would you really want to prevent students' _minds_ from wandering? I should hope not. I definately think high school students are capable of deciding if they want to pay attention or not, and just locking computers is not going to change their decisions. You might have a valid request for the 7th/8th grade students, but I still think most of them are old enough too.
The first machine I ever ran linux on was a Pentium 100Mz with 32MB of ram, I quickly got annoyed with KDE as you did and swithed to windowmaker. I still run windowmaker on that box, and I run it on my 500Mz Athlon with 128MB of RAM, and I would never think about switching WMs. RAM is cheap these days, but I have no need to buy any more since I never use what I have already. Even if I had the most cutting edge box on the planet, I would rather run windowmaker than other window managers because it has a nice clean interface and it runs beautifully. If you need the backing of someone with more reputation than myself, the Connectiva Linux distribution ships with windowmaker as the default window manager. Give it a try, and stick with it for a while. It isn't anything like Microsoft's interface, but once you get used to it you will find it is a much better one.
probably have nearly all your memory used by the buffer cache.
No, that's the problem. I know about updatedb (although I could swear it's called slocate on RedHat systems) and I would expect it to cache a lot. Unfortunately, even the +/- buffers/cache line in free reports the memory usage wrong. I don't know if the memory really is just cache and free is reporting wrong, or if somthing is going wrong with the VM and it is treating it as normal memory rather than cache.
Many people have pointed out that the article is wrong about passing on the 2.4 tree to Cox, so where does that Linus quote come from? "Alan will clearly be the maintainer of it. I just want to turn over 2.4.x to Alan in a shape where I'm personally happy with it-and I was not happy with the VM before." Did Linus really say that? I find it hard to believe he did. Is ZD just making up quotes now, or what is going on?
I have the same problem, and I have been trying to figure it out for a while now. I am 95% sure that it is triggered by something in my daily cron jobs, because I can use my computer all day and it reports memory perfectly well (as far as I can tell at least), but every morning when I wake up it reports about 90% used when I know that's not true. It tends to get fixed when I run an apt-get upgrade, but that may just be due to it using enough memory and not necesarily be due to the program itself. It happens _every_ night and only at night, which is why I'm pretty sure it's a cron job that triggers it. (haven't figured out which one yet)
Moshe Bar says _nothing_ about this subject. All he says is that the results are interesting and that they will be posted later. He seems to imply that the linux vm did better, but for all we know they might have done worse.
The first amendment most certainly does apply to the states, as does the rest of the bill of rights. Read the 14th amendment. (OK, you probably won't find it there either, but the courts have decided that the 14th amendment applys the bill of rights to the states as well)
I just bought the K&R used from Barnes and Nobel online. I can't say I'm impressed with the shape of the book, it has been highlighted, writted in, and there is something all over the cover, but I saved $10, which is worth it to me. $40 for a book that isn't that long seems a bit much for me, although I would have been willing to pay it for the K&R, but the option to buy it used was quite welcome, even if I might not do it again unless a book is quite expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
The proof of this is simple - rewind the clock back a year to MacWorld where WorldBook Encyclopedia was demoed as part of the keynote with everyone watching and they were all impressed.
When have mac users not been impressed at MacWorld? BBSpot has a great parody story Apple Faithful Ready "Ooohs", "Aaahs" for Jobs Keynote. I'm not trying to criticize Mac users here at all, I'm just saying that impressing people at MacWorld doesn't prove much at all.
you need a scanning electron microscope to read it.
:)
I can't wait for the day that someone will figure out how to just hook bluetooth up to this thing
Yes, that's exactly why it should be made a new topic. If it were it's own separate topic, people who want to see every single kernel version post can see them, while those who don't can just filter them out. All that is being asked is that each person can easily filter out kernel version posts, not that they be stopped altogether.
NO! This is the beginning of a development branch. When a new devel branch opens up there are tons of changes made that may break various things. If you really know what you are doing and you want to try this kernel for _testing_ then go ahead, but it should not be used for bugfixes. There may be a bugfix or two that you like, but there are other changes that could destroy your system.
And the nopentium option slowing your computer down is in your head, I am running the same thing right now and it isn't noticible.
Try running a web server....
Try running a web server? Not even close, try just _pinging_ from the outside world.
Comcast blocks all traffic origination from outside their networks that I can find.
Wonder if we are going to see the new Purple Hat Linux :)
I almost got excited about this, then I realized that the Cable companies couldn't manage a decent ISP if you held a gun to their heads (believe me, I wish I could). As someone who has had cable modems since '95, let me tell you it has not been pretty. After the recent @home fiasco, I have lost all faith that even if this technology ever comes about, that it will be even close to anyone's expectations because the cable companies will ruin it.
We need an enemy to make ourselves feel better and killing becomes addictive after a while.
Reminds me of one of my favorite PLIF comics :
Bet you thought the world was round, didn't you? Bet you believed there were 'Bad Guys' and 'Good Guys' and people out there like us. There are no people like us. There is nobody else. We are stranded in space, waging war on ghosts to feel less alone. Welcome to Planet America.
I have an AMD Athlon 500Mz, with the most godawful motherboard (one of the ones based off the AMD _reference_ board), 128MB of RAM, an sblive, a TNT2, and a usb mouse. I haven't used a modem since 1995, so I won't get you started.
It works just fine for anything I do. I can watch divx perfectly well. Other than when I am watching a movie, using a game console emulator, or compiling something, I almost never see my processor usage go above 90% for more than a few seconds at a time. I have a monitor that lights up whenever it does go above 90%, so I can say this with certianty. 15-20 seconds is usually the longest, and that is mostly when I open a big program like the gimp or OpenOffice. I have no problem with the speed of my computer.
Granted, I have an SBlive, and a TNT2, which you admit lessens the need for speed. So what? Who can't afford an SBlive value? I got mine a few years ago for $20, if that's too much them please tell me where you get computer components. The TNT2 is there because I was thinking of getting into gaming when I bought the system, although it never really happened(coding is more fun than quake). If you aren't playing games your video card doesn't really matter that much. In fact, I actually wish that I had gotten something else, with better linux support.
Don't say that your requirements should be the standard, because it's not true. I don't know what you do that needs a system like you describe, but I find my system is fine for Multimedia, programming, word processing, personal web serving, web surfing, e-mail, and non-3d gaming.
The Olympics are a very profitable buisness. Like it or not, they are going to do everything in their power to maintain control of their product. What is their product you ask? Thier product is broadcast rights to the olympic games. Allowing web media more coverage will eat into their exponentially more profitable television broadcast rights, and so it makes little sense for them to do it.
Athelete sites are another matter. If atheletes don't like the terms of the Olympics, the don't enter them! No one if forced to be in the Olympics, they are an independant organization that holds an event, they get to set the rules. If their rules are not acceptable to an athelete, they should not enter them.
Now there is the question of whether or not what they are doing is right. Imagine you were a company that sells Do-It-Yourself books. Would it be wrong of you to prevent your employees from Making web sites that teach people do to do the same things that a book they worked on for you taught them to do? Would it be wrong of you to prevent other people from buying your book and putting it on the web for everyone to see? Of course it would not be wrong, I should hope anyone should be able to see that. The olympics are the same sort of case.
Let me lastly say that I don't like what has happend to the olympics. Even though what they are doing is perfectly just, I don't like it. I did not watch the Nagano Olympics for that reason, and I do not plan to watch the current ones either. But what I like has nothing to do with what is right.
I'm not saying I think the survey is wildly wrong, but I do think it is low because of the fact that anyone who sends Linux as their user agent is shooting themself in the foot. There are a whole lot of websites that will tell you that you need to be running a certian browser or Operating system, yet if you change your user agent the site works perfectly. I don't know many people that haven't switched thier user agent to something onther than linux.
Possible early applications include lipreading input.
Didn't we learn anything from 2001? You would think that people wouldn't be so eager to teach computers to read lips.
How many people are there going to bethat are so ingrained with Microsoft products that they insist on using Outlook despite its many many flaws, yet they are willing to choose anything other than exchange?
Obviously not a comment from a Unix system user.
Obviously this is a comment from a Mac user. I don't mean this as a flame. The idea presented basically tries to maximize ease of use to the computer illiterate with no regard for how much it hurts actual functionality. Apple has been tdoing this for years. They hide any real information from the user to make things easier on them. They got rid of the CLI, the next logical step is to remove the filesystem.
Again, I'm not trying to mac bash here, I even suggest macs to people who say all they want to do is browse the web and read e-mail. But the more you really want to use a computer, you realize that the more information you can get your hands on the better. This desktop idea would only serve to let people use the very basic functions of a computer, but it will never let them get any further than that.
Do people really use desktops for storing files? I know I see lots of half computer literate users with tons of stuff on the desktop, but anyone that understands computers rarely uses it for more than launching programs and maybe a few very important directories. Many of the linux window managers don't even allow you to store files on the dsktop, in fact, only the ones that tend to be emulating MS Windows do let you put things there. I use WindowMaker and I have never once wished I could place any files on the desktop.
This article is calling for the redesigning of basic filesystem operations because of an overly misused feature that a few GUI systems have. The "everything is a desktop" idea woudl be impossible to implement on anything that relys on non GUI systems. It would also mean that practically every application on earth would have to be redesigned to accomidate this filesystem method.
Rather than change everything to accomidate better understanding of this overly used feature, why not get rid of it? Teach people about the way computers really work with files, rather than keeping them in the dark about whats going on.
Give a NeXT style GUI system a chance, try WindowMaker or Blackbox, or if you are on Windows install Litestep. Give it some time and you will realize how poinless having files on the desktop really is.
Any math teacher that worries about students cheating by storing things in their caclulators should not be teaching. It means that they are testing the studens more on straight memorization than on thinking and reasoning. If you made tests that actually tested student's understanding of the material rather than what they memorized would eliminate the worry of notes in caclulators, since you can't store understanding in a calulator.
I don't use WindowsXP, but while a friend and I were working on something that used a 2MB dictionary file, we tried opening it in NotePad and to our surprise it worked. I used to hate the size limits for NotePad, and I'm glad to see they have fixed that by now, even if I don't use windows anymore.
Why go through all this just to stop kids from fooling around in class? If they are not going to pay attention in class then it is their loss. I not saying that no measures whatsoever should be taken in classrooms to make students pay attention, but there is a limit to it. If it was technologically possible would you really want to prevent students' _minds_ from wandering? I should hope not. I definately think high school students are capable of deciding if they want to pay attention or not, and just locking computers is not going to change their decisions. You might have a valid request for the 7th/8th grade students, but I still think most of them are old enough too.
The first machine I ever ran linux on was a Pentium 100Mz with 32MB of ram, I quickly got annoyed with KDE as you did and swithed to windowmaker. I still run windowmaker on that box, and I run it on my 500Mz Athlon with 128MB of RAM, and I would never think about switching WMs. RAM is cheap these days, but I have no need to buy any more since I never use what I have already. Even if I had the most cutting edge box on the planet, I would rather run windowmaker than other window managers because it has a nice clean interface and it runs beautifully. If you need the backing of someone with more reputation than myself, the Connectiva Linux distribution ships with windowmaker as the default window manager. Give it a try, and stick with it for a while. It isn't anything like Microsoft's interface, but once you get used to it you will find it is a much better one.
probably have nearly all your memory used by the buffer cache.
No, that's the problem. I know about updatedb (although I could swear it's called slocate on RedHat systems) and I would expect it to cache a lot. Unfortunately, even the +/- buffers/cache line in free reports the memory usage wrong. I don't know if the memory really is just cache and free is reporting wrong, or if somthing is going wrong with the VM and it is treating it as normal memory rather than cache.
Many people have pointed out that the article is wrong about passing on the 2.4 tree to Cox, so where does that Linus quote come from? "Alan will clearly be the maintainer of it. I just want to turn over 2.4.x to Alan in a shape where I'm personally happy with it-and I was not happy with the VM before." Did Linus really say that? I find it hard to believe he did. Is ZD just making up quotes now, or what is going on?
I have the same problem, and I have been trying to figure it out for a while now. I am 95% sure that it is triggered by something in my daily cron jobs, because I can use my computer all day and it reports memory perfectly well (as far as I can tell at least), but every morning when I wake up it reports about 90% used when I know that's not true. It tends to get fixed when I run an apt-get upgrade, but that may just be due to it using enough memory and not necesarily be due to the program itself. It happens _every_ night and only at night, which is why I'm pretty sure it's a cron job that triggers it. (haven't figured out which one yet)
Moshe Bar says _nothing_ about this subject. All he says is that the results are interesting and that they will be posted later. He seems to imply that the linux vm did better, but for all we know they might have done worse.
The first amendment most certainly does apply to the states, as does the rest of the bill of rights. Read the 14th amendment. (OK, you probably won't find it there either, but the courts have decided that the 14th amendment applys the bill of rights to the states as well)
I just bought the K&R used from Barnes and Nobel online. I can't say I'm impressed with the shape of the book, it has been highlighted, writted in, and there is something all over the cover, but I saved $10, which is worth it to me. $40 for a book that isn't that long seems a bit much for me, although I would have been willing to pay it for the K&R, but the option to buy it used was quite welcome, even if I might not do it again unless a book is quite expensive.